The High Court · 2025

Heard Sri P.V.Krishnaiah, and learned Assistant on behalf of the Petitioner Government Pleader for Services-I appearing on behalf of learned counsel aPPearlng the resPondents. r r c d e u s r 2 Th as under: "...to issue a writ order or direction more in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the Proceedings Rc'No' 666U82/2017, dated 2g/Ol/2org issued bv the Respondent No. 3 as reiterated by the Respondent No 2 through Proceedings Rc'No'1284/5er'LV-2l2Ol5' dated LO/04/2Olg and the proceedings of the Respondent No.3 in Rc.No.6661/82/2017, dated 16/04/2019 and OB/0612020 as illegal, arbitrary, violative of Arts' 14' 16 and 3OO-A of the Constitution of India and consequentially to direct the respondents to grant Selection Grade Scale along with arrears as recommended by the Respondent No'3 through his Lr. No.6661/B212OOB, daled 74/02/2017 and to pass '" II 2 3 The a e a e! s o oft t The petitioner was Teacher on 08.t2.L969, f db h a r VI n sa er: - SN. J s e itio eri appointed as Secondary Grade Board subsequenily promoted as school assistant in school head

31.10.2000. the year 1999 and thereafter promoted master on 08.05.2000, and retired from as prirn a ry service on G.O.Ms.No.173 petitioner was through G.O.Ms.No.191 Grade Scale, however It is further the case of the working as SGT, dated 13.06.1969 petitioner that while the the government issued introducing the Selection the same was abolished completely 11.11.1992 and proposed to recover the benefits extended to SGTs under the said scheme. Aggrieved by the above said recovery process the petitioner along with five(S) others filed R.p.No.15669 to 75674 of 1989 before the A'p'Administrative Tribunar ancJ the Tribunar vide order, dated 24.L2.tgg3 allowed the said petition by quashing the orders of recovery. Thereafter, the Respondent no.3 submitted proposals to Respondent no.2 seeking appropriate orders from the government, however, the claim of the -(' a/ 9 3 SN, J petitioner was rejected by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings dated 18.11.2009. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed o.A.No.2g22of2010beforetheA.P.AdminstrativeTribunaland the same was disposed of by an order dated 05'05'2010 on the lines of order passed in O.A.No.4361 of 2009 and the benefits of the said order was extended to the petitioner' Thereafter, the respondents filed W.P.No 22506 of 2010 to assail the order passed in O.A.No.2922 of 2OlO but this Court was pleased to dismiss the same by an order dated 26.03'2015' It is further the case of the petitioner that the respondent no.3 submitted proposals for sanction of payment of arrears to the petitioner and others, however the case of the fetitioner was rejected vide proceedings dated 01.09.2018' Aggrieved by the same the petitioner made a representation to the znd respondentseekingtoconsiderthecaseofthepetitionerandin pursuance to the said representation 2nd respondent directed the 3'd respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for selection grade scale in terms of the order passed in O'A'No' 2922 of 2010 dated 16'04.2010' It is the specific case of the petitioner that in spite of the clear directions from the 2nd \- 4 SN. J respondent, the 3'd respondent rejected the case of the petitioner vide proceedings Rc.No.6661/B 3/2017, dated 29.0L.2019 on the ground of pendency of cases in High Court with regard to the said matter and subsequenfly the same was upheld by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings dated 10.04.2019. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner preferred the present writ petition. 4 PER USED TH E REC ORD A. The relevantD orti on of he ord er of And hra Pr de h Administratrve Tribunal at ]lv erab of v o ss di o A. o5. o5. 20 2 of r f e e to er s r:- d e The Tribunal after examining the hacts and -tt e Respondents to circumstances of the case directed extend the benefit of selection g.aae siaie to- the applicant and consequent to the orders oi tn.r.,Ornui Respondents 1 and B issued the above proceeaing, in loilptiance of the orders of the Tribunal. Though tht c;;.enr issued orders in GO.Ms.No.4 unO- CO.lls.fvo.l9'r regarding abolition of the scheme of selection gi.A" urO instructing th9 concerned not to entertain itre- ipJrications for el-Tlion grade posts as the empfovee!' were given sufficient to represent their casei, b!- virtue of the orders of the Tribunal, proceeOingi'r;J.e issued by Respondents 1 and B. When there ii-u Oi.".tion from the I:,bylu,t the Treasury authorities u." ,otlrpposed to raise an objection by virtue of co.Ms.No.+ anO C6lllr.No.191 as :l:-:f9.:.:. were passed ov tr,"-i.iL-riu]"on z:_s_rsss suosequent to the issue of the said GOs., Therefore, the -time a/ f ) SN. J objections raised by the Treasury Authorities are untenable. In the result, the OA is allowed' The applicant is entitled to revision of pension and other retirement benefits as per pioceeOings dated 2.7.L999 issued by the 1st respondent 5s-calculaied by the Bth Respondent through Proceedings dt. 29.9.1999. VMAs are dismissed' No order as to costs.'' 2. In view of the above, the benefit of the above order is extended to the applicant herein also with the declaration that the applicant in this OA is entitled to revision of pension and'other retrial benefits as per the proceedings' dated 02.07.1999 issued by the respondent, as calculated' B 2 T D VI Be h u me of his u 3 15 .P.N .225 & 22531 ot 10 extracted hereunder:- O.A.No.2292 of 2010 and O'A'No'2181 of 2010 were disposed of by the Tribunal, by its orders dated 05'05 2010 unO fO.O+.2010 respectively, specifically re.cording the submission of both the counsel for the appliGnt qnd lle learned Government Pleader that the lssue involved ln tne O.As. was covered by the order passed by the Tribunal in o.A.No.4361 0f 2oo5 dated 19.08.2009' While the learned Government Pleader for Services would make a feeble attempt to contend before us that the tearned Government Pleader before the Tribunal ought not to have given his consent, the affidavits filed in support of both the Writ Petitions are silent regarding action, if any' taken-by the Government against the learned Government Pleader before the Tribunal for his having given his consent without instructions from the Government' In the absence of any such averment in the affidavits filed in support of both the Writ Petitions, we see no reason to examine whether or not the learned Government Pleader before the 6 SN, .I I; ffi : l, Tf #f l, if # [,,"J i;,1?,,fl? ".i3 i::f; 3,-,: 0,, n " As the order, under challen 9e in both these Writ Peti tions, are consent orders we see no reason to exe rctse disc retion uncjer Article 226 of the Constitutron of India to inte rfere. The Writ petitions fail and are dismrssed. Miscell aneous petiti ons pendin9, if 6ny, sha ll a ccord in sty, c| so stand dismiss ed. There sha ll be no ord er as to costs. c T n atio roc e I r 66 rss ue b ther es on en extracted hereu n er:- d n B2 t N o .3 e u o I e

4. 7 nt No.2i s jin#"x t#i' i##ii:;t rf i:'n:lF j,Ji *t ir #*,miiiif ffi tr",ii;tr iir,ffi ,1i.,;,;;,4!;-'{:ll";;l j#ii,''.','i.,;tr *p"v"*'*":;:;"f ,,,,[i,":.1"#"[,"[il:[::i;i; "i,x if ;6'{,!i1'!iil#:i:r,ffi ${unl::["ii,",,:':'r:] t rade Sca le. Fu.rther, it is submitted ;: ; L i t F',: t&, 1;*?i :[:'i Ft,.s',:ffil[':', ff iil? ;ul:;a;: "tii# lii3'f,j, No.21'1/2ot -;;,' l.",T""'il fil# =lr!'i r%1?_.5;l8. *or8fo"o#"i,i 3'^ ll r C, 7 SN, J 2922/2010 Dt: 05.05.2010 as the applicants are entitled to and other benefits of Selectron Grade revision of Pension Sca le. It is to submit that, in the above two O'As orders were issued for payment of arrears in respect of the applicants in the said O.As vlde Hon'ble APAT. Hyderabad Orders Dt: 16-04-2010 in O.A.No.21B1l2010 and 05-05-2010 in o.A.No.2922 /20t0. It is to submit that, a Writ petition bearing No: 22531/2OlO was filed by the Department against the Orders of Hon'ble APAT, Hyderabad in O.A.No.21B1l2010 and W.P.No.225O6|2OLO against the Orders of Hon'ble APAT, Hyderabad in O.A. No. 2922/2OL0. It is to submit that, the Hon'ble Court for the State oF Telangana, Hyderabad in its common Order Dt:26-03-2015 has d-ismissed the Writ Petition bearing No:22506/2010 and W.P.No 2253L12010 stating that' the Writ Petition failed and are all accordingly dismissed". It is to submit that, the Director of School Education, Telangana, Hyderabad vide the reference cited, has directed to submit a detailed report with Speciflc remarks' In this connection, it is to submit that, the then Dy' Educational Officer(FAC) Zilla Parishad, Nizamabad has addressed a letter to the Director of School Education, A'P' Hyderabad vide his Lr.No.E2l629/2008., Dt: 13-10-2008 in which it has shown the amount of arrears eligible by the applicants are as follows: 1) Sfl B. Jacob Prem Kumar applicant in O.A.No. 2922/2070 Rs' 214082 00 2) Sri S. Venkata Swamy applicant in O.A.No. I:.€L/2O!O Rs 1,39,351-00 3) Sn P. Muttena applicant in O-A.No. 2t87l29t1 Rs. 1,14,001-O0 4) Sri C. Narsaiah applicant in O.A.l!o. ZLA!2O|O Rs. 1,08,479-00 5) Smt. V.Indira applicant in O.A.No. 21AL/2O7O Rs 1,77,578-00 _,,1 8 SN..I It is to submit that. the Commissioner & Director of School Education, Ap, Hyderabad had Communicated the above information to the Secretary to the Government for School Education, Department, Ap Hyderabad vide Lr. Rc. Nc.355 4/ c.4/ L993. Dr: 19-1 1-2001. It is to submit that, all the applicants in O.A.No.21B1/2070 and 2922/2OlO have.represented to the District Educational Officer., Nizamabad for sanction of arrears as per Hon'ble High Court Orders vide Lr.No. Nil Dated: 07-05-2015 and 26-05-2015. This is submitted for favour of kind necessary Orders to avoid further legal the matter. information and complications in D The relevant D ortion ed, Rc. No.56 LIB2I 2017. dated 29.O t.20L9 issuedbv the res ondent N o.3 is extracted hereu nder:- - impuqn oft he order Consequently the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in WpMp No: 44660 of 20t2in 35152 of 2012 and WpMp No: 44364 of 2Ot2 in 34901 of 2012 have issued orders dated 07.06.2013 & '10.06.2013 respectively as follows. ORDER:- "In this application, petitioners are seeking suspension of order, dated 05.07.2012 passed by the Ap Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad in OA No: 5433 of 2010 By aforesaid order, the Tribunal following its earlier order, dated 13.04.1993 in R.P No: 7394 of 19BB and batch, allowed the O.A. The respondent herein, who retired as SGBT teacher a decade ago, had claimed Selection Grade Scale of pay, by filing aforesaid O.A. 9 SN. J -selection As it is stated by the learned Government Pleader appearing for the petitioners herein that the scheme for Grade Scale of Pay was cancelled as grant of 6arly as in 1992, whether such claim of the respondent can be allowed at this point of time or not, is a matter, which requires consideration as the same will have effect on similarly placed Persons. For the aforesaid reason s, the tm uqned orde r sha ll rema in susoended ti ll disoosal of the Writ Petition Therefore the consideration of the cases-shall ultimately tinkers with the orders of the Hon'ble High Court in the matter and also runs contrary to the litigation pending in the matter as the Hon'ble High Court already suspended the orders of the Hon'ble Tribunal on 07'06'2013 and 10.06.2013 which are pending before the Hon'ble High Court at present. Moreover, the O.As referred in the Hon ble Tribunal orders were also subject matter of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. In pursuance of the above orders of the Hon'ble High Court, Hyderabad, the applicants are hereby informed that the request for Selection Grade Scale will be examined if necessary, after the disposal of the pending WPs in the matter. \ DISCUSSION AND coNc LU SION:-

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly contends that on an earlier occasion' the petitioner approached the APAT, at Hyderabad by filing O.A.No.2922 of 2O1O and the same was disposed of in favour of the petitioner vide order, dated O5.O5.2OtO, with a clear observation that the petitioner in the present \ IO Writ petition who is an appticant in O.A.No.2922 of 2O1O is entifled for revision and other retrial benefits as per the proceedings dated 02.o7.1g99 issued by the l"t respondent, as calculated. SN. J 6 In Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petataoner submits that aggrieved by the said order, dated 05.05.201O passed O.A.No.2922 of 2OLO, the respondents had filed W.p.Nos. 22506 & 22531 of 201O and the same had been dismissed vide Division Bench judgment of this Cour! dated 26.O3.2O15 and hence, the order, dated O5,O5.2OlO passed in O.A.No .2922 of zOtO had attained its finality.

7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner further submits that in pursuance to the dismissat of the Writ Petition Nos. 22506 & 22531 of 2O1O preferred by the respondents herein, the 3.d respondent vide his Lr.No.6661/B.2/2OOg, dated 14.O2.2O17 addressed to the Director of School Education, Hyderabad (referred to and extracted above) submitted a detailed report for sanction of arrears in favour of the petitioner as per the orders of f, APAT, HYderabad, O.A.No.2181 /2OLO' dated 16.O4.2010 Passed SN. J Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 8. petitioner submits that in spite of clear recommendations of the 3'd respondent issued in favour of the petitioner' dated 14.02 .2Ot7 addressed to the 2nd respondent' no steps had been taken by the respondents as on date to comply with the orders obtained by the petitioner' dated O5.O5.2010 in O'A'No'2922 ot 2O1O which had attained finality with the Division Bench judgment of this Court vide its order, dated 25'O3'2015 passed in writ Petition Nos. 22506 & 2253t of 2O1O and therefore' the Writ Petition should be allowed as prayed for' t the orders

9. This Court opines that without Considering obtained by the petitioner in favour of the passed bY impugned order, dated 29'O1'2019 had been the 3'd respondent stating that the request for Selection Grade Scale would be examined if necessary after the disposal of the pending writ petition in the matter' petitioner, t2 SN, J

10. This Court opines that the pendency of the Writ Petition referred to in the order impugned, dated 29.O1.2O19 in Lr.No.666t/P.2/2OLt has no relevance to the facts of the present case, in view of the fact as borne on record that the petitioner obtained relief way back on 05.05.2010 in O.A.No.2922 ot 2O1O which had been confirmed by the Division Bench judgment of this Cotrrt vide its order, dated 26.03.201S passed in Writ petition Nos. 225O6 & 22531 of 2O1O preferred by the respondent herein aggrieved by the order, dated 05.05.2O1O passed in O.A.No.2922 of 2O1O and therefore, denying the relief granted to the petitioner in the said orders tantamounts to not only delaying the matter but denying tqe justice to the petitioner depriving the petitioner of petitioner,s legitimate rights.

11. Takinq into onsid ra to a) The aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case. b) The submissions made by the learned counse! appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Assistant Government pleader for Services_f appearing on behalf of the respondents. l ? J SN. J c) The order of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal at Hyderabad, dated O5'05'2O1O passed in O'A'No'2922 ot 2010 in favour of the petitioner (referred to and extracted above) d) The Division

25.03.2015 Passed (referred to and extracted above) Bench judgment of this Court' dated W.P.Nos.225O6 & 2253L of 2O1O e) The contents of the recommendation in favour of the Lr. No.666 1 / 82 I 2OO8, dated respondent No'3 to the petitioner vide Proceedings L4.O2.2OL7 issued bY the respondent No'2 (referred to and extracted above) The contents of the order imPugned vide dated 29.O1.2019 issued bY the f) Rc.No.6661/ 82l2Ot7, respondent No'3 (referred to and extracted above) rejecting the request of the petitioner for Selection Grade Scale on the ground of pendency of other writ petitions in aroutihe,casualmannerwithoutapplicationofmind. This Court opines that the order impugned Rc.No.6661/ FJz/2AL7, dated 29'O1'2019 passed by the 3'd 14, SN, J respondent and intimated to the petitioner by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings, dated LO.O4.2O:rg, 16.04.2019 and Og.O6.2O2O hacl been passed mechanically without assigning any reasons, withorrt application of mind, without perusing the materia! on record, without taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner obtained faourable orders in O.A.No.2922 of 2O1O, dated O5.O5.2O1O which had been confirmed vide order of the Division Bench judgment of this court, dated 26.03.2015 passed in W.p.Nos.22506 & 22531 of 2OlO and that the same had attained finality, since the respondents had not challenged the said orders before Apex Court as on date and also there is a clear recommendation as borne on record in favour of the petitioner, clated 2.z[-t7 issued by the 3rd respondent addressed to the 2nd respondent herein and therefore, this Court opines that the petitioner is entifled for the relief as prayed for by the petitioner in the piesent Writ petition. Accordingly, the orders impugned are dectared as iltegal, i.e., dated 29.O1.2OL9 issued by the 3rd respondent, and dated LO.O4.2OL9, 16.04.2019 & 08.06.2020 issued by the

114.0 f l5 SN, J f ( 2nd respondent and the respondents are directed reconsider the request of the petitioner for grant Selection Grade Scale along with arrears' duly taking 'nto consideration the order, dated O5'O5'201O passed in O.A.No.2922 of 2O1O, the Division Bench iudgment of this Court, dated 26'03'2015 passed in W'P'Nos'225O6 & 2253tof 201O and the clear recommendation' in favour of the petitioner vide proceedings Lr'No'666tlB2l2OO8' datedl4.o2.2olTissuedbytherespondentNo.3tothe respondentNo.2withinaperiodoffour(04)weeksfrom the date of receipt of the copy of the order' in accordance to law, in conformity with principles of natural justice and pass aPProPriate reasoned orders Pertaining to the request of the petitioner to grant Selection Grade Scale along with arrears as recommended by the 3rd respondentthroughLetter.666lls2lzoos,dated L4.O2.2OL7 and duly communicate the decision to the petitioner. I L2. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed' However' there shall be no order as to costs' I l6 SN. J Miscella neous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition, shall stand closed. r/ //TRUE COPYII SD/. A.V.S.PRASAD DEPUTY REGISTRAR A./ SECTION OFFICER of school Edication, Government of reransana, Nampaly, Illil,ffi [ii#iiii?r?Ei?li Education Department, secretariat, r!13"?53:ft The District Educational Of ff itsJ;.sst?,j#Bbffi sd;r{iE$,',.dfl"yti::,:::,":"::;:; Two CD Copies O.. To 1 a 3 4 6 PSK. T HIGH COURT DATED:09 t07t2025 CC TODAY ORDER WP.No.21BZi of 2021 c il? at- --).) ,...) Ni q Stq -i': 'l;' ':',.)..-::'' + r?, F I A, ALLOWTNG THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS Ll